[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2779?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12964500#action_12964500
]
Shai Erera commented on LUCENE-2779:
------------------------------------
In my app, I need to server ~50 qps on a single JVM. And that JVM is dedicated
entirely for reading the index (so the 'WriteLock' will in fact never be
required. I don't think this will be a huge performance gain, but as one smart
guy once said on the mailing list, if we keep adding 1 to 1, eventually it adds
up to a big gain.
So I do think RWLock is in place. Also, I think CocurrentHashMap nearly
perfectly matches here, except for the listAll() case where I still need to
figure out if something will go wrong in case the map is modified in the middle
of iteration.
> Use ReadWriteLock in RAMDirectory
> ---------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-2779
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2779
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Store
> Reporter: Shai Erera
> Assignee: Shai Erera
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 3.1, 4.0
>
>
> RAMDirectory synchronizes on its instance in many places to protect access to
> map of RAMFiles, in addition to updating the sizeInBytes member. In many
> places the sync is done for 'read' purposes, while only in few places we need
> 'write' access. So I think ReadWriteLock can be useful.
> Also, syncing around sizeInBytes is unnecessary IMO, since it's an AtomicLong
> ...
> I'll post a patch shortly.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
